Gutowski filled out an application, paid $110, got his fingerprints taken by the police, and was still denied his Second Amendment right to bear arms. According to the city, Gutowski did not provide enough reason for the “need” of a weapon for self-defense, even though he has been threatened many times before.

“You never know what’s going to happen–the world is an unpredictable place, and I want to be prepared,” Gutowski said.

Gutowski said that there is a good chance that the city’s current system could be deemed unconstitutional yet again.

“As of today, they’ve approved 16 permits out of a city of 600,000,” Gutowski said.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/issues/wfbs-stephen-gutowski-discusses-his-rejection-for-a-dc-concealed-carry-permit-on-kennedy/feed/0For a DC Carry Permit, Among the Rejectedhttp://freebeacon.com/issues/for-a-dc-carry-permit-among-the-rejected/
http://freebeacon.com/issues/for-a-dc-carry-permit-among-the-rejected/#commentsFri, 20 Feb 2015 17:25:06 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=394189After a federal judge struck down D.C.’s outright ban on carrying firearms I applied for one of the newly created concealed carry permits. A bunch of paperwork, time, and hassle later, the city got my fingerprints and $110 and I got nothing:

The Firearms Regulations Control Act of 1975, (D.C. Official Code 7-2501 et seq.), and Chapter 23 (Guns and Other Weapons) of Title 24 (Public Space and Safety) of the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR), establish the qualifications and procedures for the issuance of a license to carry a concealed pistol,” the letter from Sargent Colin Hall said. “Based on these criteria, your application has been denied.

Bolding and underlining in the original.

According to D.C. police, I have no “good reason” to carry a firearm in the city.

“The applicant did not demonstrate a good reason to fear injury to person or property, or other proper reason for a concealed carry license.”

But my application also documented online threats I have received that include comments such as “you’re gonna get it so bad, we’re comin for ya.” Oh, and this gem: “I have a poster of you on my wall and every day I fantasize about how you’re gonna get it so bad, you bootlicker, you snitch, you dirty red-coat.”

Apparently being the object of the rants of an unstable nut doesn’t “meet the minimum requirement of showing: ‘a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community,’” a constitutionally questionable standard in and of itself.

The process, from application to rejection, took 90 days. They must have been held up by having to go through the other 68 applications they’ve received so far.

My options are pretty limited now that I’ve been denied a permit. The city is already being sued by the Second Amendment Foundation on behalf of others who’ve been denied, and it’s too late for me to join the suit. The only other option I have left is to appeal the ruling, in writing, within 15 days and hope a different set of D.C. bureaucrats finds my reasons good enough to allow me to exercise my right to bear arms.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/issues/for-a-dc-carry-permit-among-the-rejected/feed/0European Criminals and Terrorists Have 67 Million Guns to Choose From Despite Strict Gun Controlhttp://freebeacon.com/issues/european-criminals-and-terrorists-have-67-million-guns-to-choose-from-despite-strict-gun-control/
http://freebeacon.com/issues/european-criminals-and-terrorists-have-67-million-guns-to-choose-from-despite-strict-gun-control/#commentsThu, 19 Feb 2015 21:22:27 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=393811After a recent spat of terrorist attacks in the European Union, many are grappling with one question: Why didn’t Europe’s strict gun control keep guns out of the hands of dangerous extremists? Restrictions and outright bans on firearms have not prevented terrorists and criminals alike from obtaining them, the Washington Post reported.

In contrast with the free-firing United States, Europe is generally seen as a haven from serious gun violence. Here in Denmark, handguns and semiautomatic rifles are all but banned. Hunting rifles are legally available only to those with squeaky-clean backgrounds who have passed a rigorous exam covering everything from gun safety to the mating habits of Denmark’s wildlife.

“There’s a book about 1,000 pages thick,” said Tonni Rigby, owner of one of only two licensed firearms dealers in Copenhagen. “You have to know all of it.”

But if you want an illicit assault rifle, such as the one used by a 22-year-old to rake a Copenhagen café with 28 bullets on Saturday, all it takes are a few connections and some cash.

“It’s very easy to get such a weapon,” said Hans Jorgen Bonnichsen, a former operations director for the Danish security service P.E.T. “It’s not only a problem for Denmark. It’s a problem for all of Europe.”

The weapons are so widely available that at least one European Union official says even average criminals can find them.

“You can find Kalashnikovs for sale near the train station in Brussels,” acknowledged a Brussels-based European Union official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the record. “They’re available even to very average criminals.”

In the case of the Paris attackers, they were able to obtain an entire arsenal: AK-47 assault rifles, pistols, a Skorpion submachine gun and even a rocket-propelled grenade launcher. All of it was purchased in Brussels for about $5,000, according to Belgian media reports.

A European Commission study estimated there were more than 65 million illegal guns available in Europe.

Even assessing the scale of the problem has proven too difficult for Europe. A comprehensive European Commission study released last year cited an estimate of 67 million illicit firearms across the continent. But it also noted the total was probably overstated and concluded that “no accurate quantification of the problem is feasible.”

]]>http://freebeacon.com/issues/european-criminals-and-terrorists-have-67-million-guns-to-choose-from-despite-strict-gun-control/feed/0ATF to Ban Popular Ammunitionhttp://freebeacon.com/issues/atf-to-ban-popular-ammunition/
http://freebeacon.com/issues/atf-to-ban-popular-ammunition/#commentsThu, 19 Feb 2015 16:00:18 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=393436The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has announced its intention to ban the manufacture and sale of a popular type of ammunition used in AR-15 rifles.

On Feb. 13, the ATF issued a notice of its intention to reclassify the M855 round, also known as “green tip” 5.56, as “armor-piercing ammunition” and, therefore, illegal under the Gun Control Act of 1968 and Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1986. The laws ban handgun ammunition that contains certain materials. Rounds designed to be fired from rifles, such as the “green tip” 5.56, have been exempt from these laws for decades.

The ATF has decided the availability of AR-15 variants it classifies as pistols means the “green tip” 5.56 is now handgun ammunition. It used the same justification to ban the importation of 7N6 5.45×39, a round often used in AK-47 style rifles, in April of last year.

The “green tip” variant of 5.56 is one of the most widely available types of ammunition. Shooting enthusiasts and hunters prefer the round in long-distance situations.

News of the banishment of the popular round sparked backlash.

Gun rights groups slammed the ATF and asked its members to contact the agency to voice their opposition to the proposed regulation change during the public comment period.

“Commonly available ‘green tip’ M855 and SS109 rifle ammunition that is primarily intended and regularly used for ‘sporting purposes,’ like target shooting, has been exempt from federal law banning armor-piercing ammunition for decades,” the National Shooting Sports Foundation told its members in an action alert. “There is no question that the steel-tip, lead core 5.56 ball ammo has been in wide use by law abiding American citizens for sporting purposes.”

“They are claiming that this ban is needed to protect the police,” Virginia Citizens Defense League president Philip Van Cleave told the group’s members in an email. “A total fabrication. I’ve not heard of a single officer being harmed by M855.”

The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) sent in a message to its members in regard to the change, saying, “In a move clearly intended by the Obama administration to suppress the acquisition, ownership, and use of AR-15s and other .223 caliber general purpose rifles, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives unexpectedly announced today that it intends to ban commonplace M855 ball ammunition as ‘armor piercing ammunition. The decision continues Obama’s use of his executive authority to impose gun control restrictions and bypass Congress.”

The ATF’s new restriction marks the third time in 2015 the agency has moved to implement stricter gun control.

“It isn’t even the third week of February, and the BATFE has already taken three major executive actions on gun control,” the NRA-ILA said in the same message. “First, it was a major change to what activities constitute regulated ‘manufacturing’ of firearms. Next, BATFE reversed a less-than-year-old position on firing a shouldered ‘pistol.’”

The public comment period on the proposed regulation change will end March 16, 2015.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/issues/atf-to-ban-popular-ammunition/feed/0Obama Celebrates Gun Use in BuzzFeed Healthcare Promo, Anti-Gun Activists Appalledhttp://freebeacon.com/blog/obama-celebrates-gun-use-in-buzzfeed-healthcare-promo-anti-gun-activists-appalled/
http://freebeacon.com/blog/obama-celebrates-gun-use-in-buzzfeed-healthcare-promo-anti-gun-activists-appalled/#commentsFri, 13 Feb 2015 17:10:42 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?post_type=blog&p=391696video (actually a promotion for Obamacare) that has been viewed more than 22 million times. Many have pointed out that the video itself is very silly and unbecoming of a sitting president, who makes himself look like an idiot by playing around with a “selfie” stick.]]>President Obama made a BuzzFeed video (actually a promotion for Obamacare) that has been viewed more than 22 million times. Many have pointed out that the video itself is very silly and unbecoming of a sitting president, who makes himself look like an idiot by playing around with a “selfie” stick.

However, many have also failed to realize that most BuzzFeed readers (and most Americans) eat this crap up. At least Obama can pull it off. Just imagine Hillary Clinton shooting a video like this. That’s another reason why Joe Biden should be considered the prohibitive Democratic frontrunner in 2016.

However, Obama’s promo video is problematic. Apart from the fact that the video features only men (not counting an objectifying sketch of the First Lady), there is a very problematic scene in which the president appears to promote gun violence.

BuzzFeed

Prominent anti-gun critics lashed out on Twitter:

President Obama pretends to fire a gun to promote health care. Is it just me that finds this appalling? pic.twitter.com/cZqSNDIKq0

US District Court Judge Reed O’Connor said the ban did not date to the time of the founding, was not tailored to address the problem the government intended to address, and was unconstitutional.

“The Court concludes that Defendants have not shown that the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is narrowly tailored to be the least restrictive means of achieving the Government’s goals under current law,” O’Connor said in the ruling. “The federal interstate handgun transfer ban is therefore unconstitutional on its face.”

Besides being unconstitutional on its face, O’Connor said the law was unconstitutional in how it was applied to the plaintiffs.

On June 21, 2014, Andrew and Tracy Hanson tried to buy two handguns from Texas-based gun dealer Fredric Mance. Since the Hansons are D.C. residents, a legal sale, under the interstate handgun transfer ban in the Gun Control Act of 1968, requires a D.C.-based gun dealer be involved in the transaction. The Hansons did not want to pay the hundreds of dollars in costs associated with involving a D.C.-based gun dealer in the transaction, and Mance lost the sale.

Ths Hansons and Mance, supported by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and Second Amendment Foundation, filed suit in federal court over the ban.

“Our lawsuit strikes at the heart of a debate that has been ongoing for several years, since the creation of the National Instant Check System,” Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb said in a press release. “With the advent of the NICS system, it makes no sense to perpetuate a ban on interstate transfers of handguns.”

Gottlieb said the ruling “could have far-reaching ramifications.”

“It is bizarre and irrational to destroy the national market for an item that Americans have a fundamental right to purchase,” the plaintiffs’ attorney Alan Gura said. “Americans would never tolerate a ban on the interstate sale of books or contraceptives. And Americans are free to buy rifles and shotguns outside their state of residence, so long as the dealers respect the laws of the buyer’s home state. We’re gratified that the Court agreed that handguns should be treated no differently.”

The Department of Justice had not responded to a request for comment by publishing time.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/issues/federal-judge-declares-ban-on-interstate-handgun-sales-unconstitutional/feed/0Bloomberg Wants to Strip Young Minorities of Gun Rightshttp://freebeacon.com/politics/bloomberg-wants-to-strip-young-minorities-of-gun-rights/
http://freebeacon.com/politics/bloomberg-wants-to-strip-young-minorities-of-gun-rights/#commentsMon, 09 Feb 2015 21:25:01 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=390049While speaking at an overwhelmingly wealthy, white audience at the Aspen Institute, former New York City mayor and leading gun control advocate Michael Bloomberg expressed his desire to see young minorities stripped of their gun rights. The Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Everytown USA funder reportedly believes male minorities between the ages of 15 and 25 are responsible for most murders. That’s why, he argued, cities need to take guns away from that group.

“These kids think they’re going to get killed anyway because all their friends are getting killed,” the Aspen Timesreported Bloomberg said to the audience. “They just don’t have any long-term focus or anything.”

“It’s a joke to have a gun. It’s a joke to pull a trigger.”

There’s no report on how, exactly, Bloomberg wants to see young minority men disarmed.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/politics/bloomberg-wants-to-strip-young-minorities-of-gun-rights/feed/0The Navy Shows Off Its Futuristic Railgunhttp://freebeacon.com/national-security/the-navy-shows-off-its-futuristic-railgun/
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/the-navy-shows-off-its-futuristic-railgun/#commentsMon, 09 Feb 2015 18:29:22 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=389815The United States Navy has made enough progress on its futuristic electromagnetic railgun that it’s now showing it off to the public. At this weekend’s Future Force Science and Technology Expo the Navy showed off its incredible new cannon. The railgun may even soon be ready for deployment, Foxtrot Alpha reports.

Even though the EM Railgun looks massive to spectators, the truth is that it is finally in a size that will make it applicable to the Navy’s inventory of surface combatants. With this in mind, the Railgun is set for sea trials aboard the Joint High-Speed Vessel USNS Millinocket in 2016, although this will not be a permanent installation. There is some serious talk about integrating the weapon onto the third DDG-1000 Zumwalt Class Destroyer, DDG-1002 USS Lyndon B. Johnson.

Military observers and the Navy itself are excited about the possibilities the railgun opens up for future deployments.

The realization of the EM Railgun into a reliable and field-ready weapon system clearly has the Navy in a whirl, and rightfully so. This technology could revolutionize warfare, and to be perfectly honest, it marks the return of really big ass guns to US Navy surface combatants. Who knows, it could even lead to a new “Electric Battleship” capable of slinging high-volumes of guided shells hundreds of miles in rapid succession. The sky is truly the limit.

It appears that, at least for the Navy and its railgun, the future is close at hand.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/national-security/the-navy-shows-off-its-futuristic-railgun/feed/0I Trained to Be a Police Officerhttp://freebeacon.com/culture/i-trained-to-be-a-police-officer/
http://freebeacon.com/culture/i-trained-to-be-a-police-officer/#commentsWed, 04 Feb 2015 10:00:15 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=387868I went to the office of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF) in Alexandria, Virginia, last week to see what it’s like to be a police officer. The fund is a non-profit organization that provides financial and legal aid to police officers. It recently purchased one of the shooting simulators that police academies use to train cadets.

The idea was to run some reporters through the simulator to show them the sort of split-second decisions that police are sometimes forced to make, and how officers are trained to make them. It’s not a bad idea, resting as it does on the axiom that most Beltway reporters’ opinions on guns are inversely proportional to their experience with guns.

I was there with Charles Cooke from National Review. Bryan Patterson, a use-of-force instructor for police cadets who worked for more than 30 years on the Fairfax Police Department, gave us a rundown of the legal standards that dictate when police can use force.

Then we took turns standing in front of a large projector screen that displayed one of more than 500 different live-action scenarios, from “active shooters” in school hallways to an irate woman complaining about her parking tickets. The scenarios have branching options, depending on what actions you take. For example, if you fail to talk some of the irate people down, they will bum-rush you. And you are supposed to give verbal commands, although I restrained the urge to yell, “Get down on the ground or I’ll blow your f—ng brains out!”

We were armed with a can of mace and a Glock, both refitted to shoot harmless lasers that the projector screen would pick up. Patterson gave a brief summary of what kind of call we were responding to, and then the projector began playing the scenario.

In my first scenario, I was supposed to be backing up my partner as he approached a shifty-looking guy who suddenly pulled a pistol and gunned my partner down. Partners had poor survival rates in the scenarios.

I logged serious time as a kid with video games like Duck Hunt, Area 51, and Time Crisis, not to mention Big Buck Hunter as a beer-sopped twenty-something. I’m comfortable shooting actual guns, too. So whenever an armed robber or gun-wielding maniac popped on the screen, muscle memory kicked in and my pistol snapped on target. It was as familiar as jumping over a green turtle shell in Mario.

But the purpose of the simulator is not to be an avenging angel of pixelated death. It is supposed to teach officers how to make decisions and not get caught off guard.

In another scenario, a man didn’t take well to my presence and began threatening to “whup my ass.” This went on for half a minute or so, despite my firm verbal commands to chill out, before he leaned over and grabbed a mean-looking knife off of his living room table. While I dumbly fumbled for the pepper spray in my pocket, he explained how he was going to carve me up.

“Did you see the knife on the table before he picked it up?” Patterson asked me afterward. I shook my head. It turns out Big Buck Hunter isn’t the best situational awareness development tool. Patterson said the average time it takes someone to close a distance of about 20 feet is about two-and-a-half seconds.

That scenario sobered me up a little bit and convinced me that I had no interest in joining the police force. In January, police officers in West Valley City, Utah, shot and killed a man who they say grabbed an eight-inch butcher knife from his car. And late last month, police in Longview, Texas, shot and killed a mentally ill 17-year-old girl who reportedly threatened officers with a knife. The latter case has also drawn some national headlines.

The simulator programmers keyed up some harder scenarios for Cooke. In one, he responded to a suspicious guy in a parking lot who held something that looked like a gun. The guy bolted when he saw the police and ran over to a car of loitering teenagers, where he appeared to steal their car. Cooke raised his gun but hesitated. The man peeled out of the parking lot.

“What if he just had a cell phone in his hand?” Patterson asked. Replaying the video, we couldn’t clearly see what he was holding. “What if those were his kids skipping school, and he was just yelling at them?” It seemed unlikely, but who knows?

And that’s the crux. In the space of a few seconds a police officer is supposed to—if he or she is thinking clearly—run through a complex flowchart of questions to decide if it’s legal and ethical to use lethal force.

Is the force being applied in the course of an arrest or the defense of the officer or others? Is the officer in “imminent jeopardy,” as defined under the current legal standard? Does the suspect have the intent to harm, as well as the ability, means and opportunity to do so? If the suspect is fleeing, does the officer have probable cause that the suspect was involved in a violent crime and could harm others?

The margin for error here is unforgiving, and the window to act is small. Fail to act, and you or someone else might die. Act too soon or with too much force—or even act within your authority—and you open yourself up to criminal charges and civil lawsuits.

The legal defense fund points to cases like Shaun Cowley, a West Valley City, Utah, police officer. In 2012, Cowley and his partner stopped 21-year-old Danielle Willard in a parking lot. According to the police account, Willard refused to roll down her window or cooperate. Cowley was walking back to his patrol car when Willard threw the SUV into reverse and tried to run Cowley and his partner down. Both officers opened fire, killing Willard.

Nineteen months later, the Salt Lake District Attorney indicted Cowley for second-degree manslaughter. According to the state’s own expert witness, Cowley had two seconds to react to the situation. A judge dismissed the case in October, but Cowley had racked up $100,000 in legal fees before the trial even began, according to the LELDF.

For every case like Cowley’s, which itself has several wrinkles and niggling questions, police skeptics can point to numerous other incidents where cops appear to react with unnecessary force and where there is little accountability.

Late Friday, Fairfax County dumped 11,000 pages of documents on the fatal 2013 police shooting of John Geer. Adam Torres, the officer who shot Geer, said he had suddenly dropped his hands toward his waist, possibly to grab a weapon. However, among the newly released documents were three eyewitness accounts from fellow officers contradicting Torres’ story. According to them, Geer still had his hands up when Torres shot him in the chest without warning.

The public seems to give cops the benefit of the doubt. A Reuters poll released earlier this month found three-quarters of Americans approve of the performance of their local police department, including 56 percent of African Americans, though one-third of respondents also said police routinely lie.

“The current discussion will die down,” Ron Hosko, the president of the LELDF, said in an interview. “Will there be a cop somewhere who does something obviously wrong again? Yup. But that doesn’t define our world.”

Maybe. Still, after spending a simulated afternoon making life-changing decisions that span mere, unfathomable seconds, it seemed unavoidable to me that the debate over police accountability will be going on for some time.

]]>http://freebeacon.com/culture/i-trained-to-be-a-police-officer/feed/0Columbine Survivor-Turned-Lawmaker Pushes to Arm Teachershttp://freebeacon.com/culture/columbine-survivor-turned-lawmaker-pushes-to-arm-teachers/
http://freebeacon.com/culture/columbine-survivor-turned-lawmaker-pushes-to-arm-teachers/#commentsTue, 03 Feb 2015 17:53:30 +0000http://freebeacon.com/?p=387661A Colorado state representative that survived the Columbine shooting said that arming teachers might be the key to preventing another such tragedy.

State Rep. Patrick Neville, a Republican from Castle Rock, Colo., on Monday introduced gun legislation that would allow teachers with concealed weapons permits to carry firearms in Colorado public schools.

Neville, who graduated from Columbine High School and was there on the day of the shooting in 1999, believes that arming teachers is the best way to protect students.

“This bill will allow honest law-abiding citizens to carry a concealed firearm for protection if they choose to,” Neville said. “But most importantly, it will give them the right to be equipped to defend our children from the most dangerous situations.”

Neville’s bill is a long shot in the Democrat-controlled Colorado House.

Gun control advocates have long been proponents of gun free zones and say they prevent shootings. Neville strongly disagrees.

Neville said that laws blocking teachers from carrying guns put students in harm’s way and make them “sitting targets for criminals.”

“As was the case in 1999, criminals aren’t deterred by a flashy sign on the door,” Neville said. “The only thing that is going to stop murderers intent on doing harm is to give good people the legal authority to carry a gun to protect themselves and our children.”

“Our teachers and faculty were heroic in so many ways that day,” he continued. “That’s why I truly believe had some of them had the legal authority to be armed, more of my friends would still be alive today.”